South Africa’s critical minerals endowment is a once-in-a-generation opportunity. Platinum group metals, vanadium, manganese, and rare earths place the country in the global spotlight as nations scramble for resources to fuel the green transition. The government’s Critical Minerals Strategy recognises this potential—framing mineral wealth as the foundation of industrial development and economic transformation.

But strategies are only as good as their implementation. And without addressing infrastructure collapse, power insecurity, and policy misalignment, South Africa risks squandering its moment on the world stage.

Strategy at a Glance: Ambition Meets Reality

The strategy outlines six core pillars:

• Exploration
• Beneficiation at source
• Research and development
• Regional integration
• Financial instruments
• Energy security

It’s a comprehensive framework, underpinned by values of sustainability, social justice, and economic equity—all commendable goals. It links critical minerals to key downstream sectors: renewables, EVs, hydrogen, and advanced manufacturing.

Yet the Strategy says little about how these goals will be achieved—especially in a political economy where corruption, institutional decay, and energy collapse undermine industrial confidence.

Critical List, Strategic Confusion

South Africa’s critical minerals list diverges from global norms. Rather than prioritising supply chain vulnerability, it emphasises domestic economic contribution. This upstream approach leads to the inclusion of:

However, many of these are better defined as strategic minerals—those with developmental potential—rather than critical in the supply-risk sense used by international partners. This mismatch could dilute cooperation opportunities and misguide policy interventions.

Geopolitical Puzzle: Player or Pawn?

South Africa plays a key role in minerals like PGMs, manganese, and vanadium, crucial to Western supply chains. Yet despite historic ties with Europe, China is now South Africa’s largest trade partner—and simultaneously, its most direct competitor in mineral beneficiation and component manufacturing.

India, too, while an import partner, poses a growing competitive challenge as it builds its own downstream capabilities.

Bilateral agreements abound:

• Nigeria: Joint mining cooperation and geological mapping.
• Chile: Beneficiation and battery value chains.
• Ghana: Capacity building and R&D.
• South Sudan: Critical minerals development.
• UK/EU: Strategic clean-energy minerals partnerships.

Yet partnerships alone cannot substitute for capability. To move from pawn to player, South Africa must deliver on the fundamentals.

The Barriers Are Bigger Than Bureaucracy

• Power Paralysis

No mineral strategy succeeds without electricity. Decades of corruption and underinvestment have left Eskom synonymous with dysfunction. Load shedding is the norm. Even hydrogen ambitions—touted to revive PGM demand—are hampered by the simple fact that hydrogen is a carrier, not a source of energy. No reliable, affordable baseload? No hydrogen economy.

• Broken Infrastructure

Rail, road, and port networks are deteriorating. Transnet is a bottleneck. Maintenance is delayed, investment lacking. This alone cripples South Africa’s ability to move minerals from pit to port—let alone develop domestic manufacturing capacity.

• Corruption and Governance Deficits

Widespread looting—from Eskom to VBS Mutual Bank—has corroded public trust and investor confidence. Fraudulent procurement, mismanaged land sales, and opaque permitting processes make South Africa a high-risk jurisdiction in the eyes of global investors—especially in capital-intensive sectors like EV and battery manufacturing.

• Challenging Market Dynamics

Even if South Africa could produce battery components or EVs, the market size is limited. Poor roads, expensive vehicles, lack of charging infrastructure, and income inequality dampen regional uptake. Meanwhile, the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism penalises coal-powered exports, and Chinese brands dominate Southeast Asia.

Paths to Prosperity: A Strategy Worth Saving

The Critical Minerals Strategy is not misguided—it’s ambitious, forward-looking, and grounded in national developmental needs. But it is overly aspirational without accounting for the deeply practical hurdles that lie ahead.

What must come first:

• Infrastructure
  • Urgent repairs and upgrades to rail, roads, and ports.
  • Long-term planning and investment for efficient mineral logistics.
• Energy
  • Ramp-up cheap, stable
  • De-politicise and professionalise Eskom and regulatory agencies.
• Exploration
  • Incentivise exploration across new mineral types.
  • Ensure reliable geological data gathering and maintenance through properly funded institutions.
• Governance
  • Clear, investor-friendly regulations.
  • Transparent permitting and land-use processes.
  • Real consequences for corruption—especially in SOEs.

You Can’t Beneficiate Your Way Out of Bad Governance

South Africa has the minerals. It has the world’s attention. But what it lacks is execution capacity. Critical minerals strategies don’t fail because of poor ideas—they fail because the foundations are rotten.

If South Africa wants to be more than a source of rocks, it must invest in the infrastructure, institutions, and incentives that turn resources into real value. Otherwise, the strategy will remain just that: a document, not a destiny.